The Oslo Terrorist’s ‘Counter-Jihad’ Ideology

Blood on their handsCharles Johnson

By now you’ve probably heard about Oslo terrorist Anders Behring Breivik’s “manifesto,” a 1,516-page screed with some writing by Breivik, but mostly consisting of quotes and articles by “counter-jihad” bloggers and similar right wing sources.

(You can find it on the web if you really want to read it; I won’t link to it because there are sections that are basically a manual for terrorism; Breivik goes into great detail about the assembly and testing of the bomb, his weapons and ammunition, etc.)

But I’ve seen a lot of people mistakenly attributing the articles that make up most of the manifesto to Breivik himself. In fact, the blog source that’s probably cited the most throughout Breivik’s book is Jihad Watch, run by anti-Muslim demagogue Robert Spencer; Breivik cites Robert Spencer more than 40 times, always approvingly.

And a very large number — more than three dozen — of the lengthy articles reprinted in the book are the work of the anonymous white nationalist blogger “Fjordman,” who apparently gave Breivik permission to use them.

Back in the day, I linked to Fjordman’s articles myself; he was a big self-promoter and would email and ask for links every time he posted something. But sometime around 2007 (when I criticized him and other “counter-jihad” bloggers for making deals with extreme right wing European groups) it became clear that his seeming erudition and extreme logorrhea was a cover for a particularly nasty form of European white nationalism.

And this split is actually reflected in the articles by Fjordman that Breivik put in his book. In the early pieces you’ll see complimentary links to LGF, turning into insults and revilement in the later pieces when I called them out, then wouldn’t back down or “apologize” to these racist cretins.

Many of the most extreme statements and positions I’ve seen people quoting are actually taken directly from Fjordman himself. LGF reader Gus 802 found a great example of this, in one of Fjordman’s articles from 2009, titled The Coming Crash:

Some highlights of this one article:

• I would rank Britain as the Western European country most likely to first get a civil war caused by mass immigration and Multiculturalism.

• There will be a pan-Western and perhaps international economic and social collapse in the not-too-distant future.

• We need to learn from our enemies, both internal and external…They must be squashed, otherwise we cannot deal rationally and adequately with our external enemies.

• We must get rid of Feminism, which is destructive and merely an extension of Marxism, anyway.

• We must document what is being done to us by treasonous elites for future references, for instance by making a video dedicated to anti-white verbal and physical violence around the world. We must take steps to ensure our physical safety and regain pride in our heritage.

• The current US President Obama has publicly pledged himself to combat opposition to Islam rather than Islam itself, which means that it is official US policy to spread Islamic law.

• If the Soviet Union was the Evil Empire then the USA is the Diversity Empire, committed to spreading Multiculturalism and genetic Communism around the world, especially to white majority countries.

• The United States will not survive this century. It will be split into several countries according to ethnic, racial and perhaps even ideological lines. There is no such thing as a universal nation. People want to live with their own kind. The only ones who are not allowed to do so are whites, and they are starting to get tired of this double standard.

• Anti-white ideologies are now taught in every Western university and were arguably elevated to national ideology in the USA with the election of Obama.

Just look at what these people are saying to their right wing fans; if you follow this stuff to its sickening logical conclusion, the very fate of civilization itself is at risk. It’s an apocalyptic view, a vision of a war for existence against the encroaching dark-skinned hordes.

Among people who truly believe this paranoid world view, is it any wonder that one of them finally took the next step?

Unlike Jared Loughner (the shooter of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords), with Anders Behring Breivik there’s no doubt whatsoever where he got the inspiration and the ideology that led inexorably to the horror in Oslo.

When Gabrielle Giffords and several others were shot, I was critical of the right wing blogs and Sarah Palin in particular, for encouraging a climate of violent rhetoric. But in the Norway atrocities, the responsibility is far more evident and direct.

People like Fjordman and Pamela Geller and the right wing blogosphere who spew apocalyptic rhetoric and refuse to denounce the extremists among them now have the very real blood of children on their hands.

Anders Breivik: the story no one wanted to tell

Robert Fox: An Islamist plot was so much more convenient for today’s narcissistic media

From the first, the British media, the broadcasters in particular, have had a great deal of difficulty in reporting the foreground and the background to Anders Behring Breivik’s mass murder spree in Oslo and Utoya island last Friday.

Even on the hard news bulletins, they rushed to judgment before fully and forensically investigating the facts.

By chance, on Friday night I had been invited to do the two newspaper reviews on Sky News. The full extent of the carnage caused by the bombing in the centre of Oslo and out on the island was only just becoming known from reports on the ground.

But still the questions were who and why? Only at around midnight was the name of the prime suspect, Breivik, announced. But already the news channels were full of speculation as to what had happened.

For several hours the tide was following in favour of some further outrage by Islamist militants, branches of al-Qaeda even, as if Osama bin Laden’s spectre had risen from his watery grave. ‘Norway’s 9/11’ barked the headline on the Sun‘s first edition.

It seemed that commentators started shifting from the Islamist theme with the greatest reluctance.

My co-reviewer of the papers at 10.30 pm that night on Sky, the Republican commentator and law professor Colleen Graffy, a former member of the George W Bush administration, even suggested that the fact that the perpetrator was a “blonde Norwegian male” – the only description we had at the time – could mean that the Islamist terrorists had moved to “a new level” by now recruiting native Norwegians.

Then, gingerly, the narrative of the right-wing loner, who liked to dress up in strange uniforms, began to emerge. As the world’s television crews lumbered into Norway, the anchormen and women back home struggled. The BBC, radio and television, hedged their bets.

BBC Radio News bulletins reported a behavioural psychologist saying that the suspect was not mad, as he was talking coherently and had not killed himself – which is what most perpetrators of shooting sprees, especially against children, usually do.

The more this claim for the murder’s sanity was broadcast, the more bizarre it sounded – a piece of explaining away, rather than serious analysis. It was almost as if by modern psychiatric standards, to say nothing of basic social ethics, it was quite understandable to try to blow up Norway’s prime minister in central Oslo and then try to wipe out a teenage holiday camp.

On Monday, Sam Leith in the Evening Standard wrote that Breivik was a mad loner and there was no politics to speak of in what he did and aimed to do. More judicious and nearer the mark was Roger Cohen in the International Herald Tribune yesterday. At one level, he wrote, Breivik appears “a particularly murderous psychotic loner”, but, on the other hand, his violence was brewed in “a specific European environment” which is also manifest in the USA.

In other words there are the elements of the deranged loner, but his motives, programmes and legacy are set in a deep social and political context.

There is much in common in the story so far with the incidents at Ruby Ridge in Idaho, 1992, the destruction of the Waco commune in 1993, the Aum Shinrikyo Tokyo underground attack of 1995, and the Oklahoma FBI building bombing that April.

The narratives of all these fed into each other. They were celebrated in underground ballads and manifestos, and their perpetrators became heroes to that audience. The figure of Anders Behring Breivik is sure to be installed in this black Valhalla of extremist anti-heroes, if isn’t already.

So why can’t much of mainstream media tackle this story of our time, the insane act of violence, and the context in which it is set?

First because it is too complex for most broadcast news outfits, whose coin is the 30-second sound-bite, the YouTube blurred image, marinated with instant judgment from the studio, preferably in under a minute. Second, this is a tale of Narcissus – a narcissistic killer reflected in the mirror of a narcissistic media, where performance takes precedence over cool exposition and analysis.

Thus we have the thundering clichés – “Norway losing its innocence” and “this tranquil and most peaceful of all communities”.

The truth is Norway, like Sweden, Denmark and the Netherlands, still has the traumas of the past to contend with – the shadow of Nazi occupation, collaboration and resistance – as well as the huge recent changes in society, including the sudden impact of new immigration and the new political Islam.

It is also, as Roger Cohen points out, part of the story of western ‘declinism’ – my word not his – that the steam is running out of our once prosperous economy and society.

This has been reported brilliantly by the band of writers known collectively as ‘Scandinavia Noir’ – of which the most celebrated are Stieg Larsson, Henning Mankel, Jo Nesbo and Karin Fossum.

Larsson and Nesbo plied their trade initially as investigative reporters, and the Breivik story could be almost be the plot line of any one of their stories.

The opening chapter of Mankel’s latest and last Inspector Kurt Wallender novel ends with a prescient paragraph. Curiously, it refers to the murder of the prime minister Olof Palme, but it applies just as well to Oslo and our Europe today.

“So it all began with a fit of rage. This story about the realities of politics, this journey into the swamps where truth and lies are indistinguishable and nothing is clear.”

An old Cherokee told his grandson, “My son, there’s a battle between two wolves inside us all. One is Evil. It is anger, jealousy, greed, resentment, inferiority, lies, & ego. The other is Good. It is joy, peace, love, hope, humility, kindness, empathy, & truth.” The boy thought about it & asked his grandfather, “Which wolf wins?” The old Cherokee quietly replied, “The one you feed.”

The Norwegian web site Dagbladet.no published the list of some of Anders Breivik’s “heroes”. The list is kind of revealing, hate mongers. liars and propagandists who has been living on the ant-muslim sentiment that blomster after the 9/11 terrorists attacks against New York Cities WTCs and Pentagon.

Of course all these loons now condemn the action of Anders Breivik’s horrendous crimes, but as we who have been fighting these people for the past decade pointed out, their ideology of hate gives fuel to extremists and crazy people like Anders Breivik to move one steps further and put their action where the words of these people point them to.

You can not expect to create hate and then step back and say, ooopps, I had no idea anyone would actually ACT upon our words and try to DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.

We have to put an end to this madness and expose these messengers of hate to show the world who they really are or else there will be more innocent people loosing their lives by lunatics who take the words of these people as fact and act upon it, just like Anders Breivik did on July 22nd 2011.
Here is the Google Translated article : They were Breivik heroes